SANTOSH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
LAWS(MPH)-2021-4-10
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on April 06,2021

SANTOSH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Subodh Abhyankar,J. - (1.) This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Coder, 1973 against the judgment dated 8.1.2018 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Jaora, District-Ratlam in S.T. No.258/2015, whereby the learned Judge of the Sessions Court finding the appellant guilty, has convicted him for an offence under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred as the I.T. Act) and has sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.2000/- with default clause.
(2.) The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that, on 24.9.2014, one G.B. Bamankar, Principal of G.T. Polytechnic College, Jaora filed a complaint before the Superintendent of Police Cyber Cell District-Ratlam to the effect that an e-mail has been forwarded to him by Dr. Ashish Dongare which has been sent to him by one Pankaj Kanthed's e-mail ID who is posted as Lab Technician in the said College and when G.B. Bamankar enquired regarding the said e-mail from Pankaj Kanthed, he informed that the said e-mail has not been sent by him and according to Pankaj Kanthed, e-mail ID pankajkhanthed_2014@rediffmail.com has been created by some other person fraudulently which is a cyber crime.
(3.) On this complaint, a first information report was lodged on 03.01.2015 at crime No.9/2015 under Sections 419, 468, 469 & 471 of the I.P.C. read with Section 66A(c), 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 against the unknown person and investigation ensued in which it was found that it was the present appellant Santosh Bharti who had sent the aforesaid e-mail. The charge sheet was filed and after the case was committed, the learned Judge of the trial Court, after recording the evidence, while acquitting him in respect of offences under Sections 419, 468, 469 & 471 of the I.P.C. and Section 66A(c) and 66D of IT Act, convicted the appellant as aforesaid u/s. 66C. Thus, being aggrieved, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.